The High Anti-Corruption Court has not closed the case against smuggling kingpin Vadim Alperin
The High Anti-Corruption Court considered a motion filed by the defense in the case of businessman Vadym Alperin, known as the “smuggling king,” and his alleged accomplices. The defense requested that the criminal proceedings be dismissed, but the court denied these requests.
Thus, criminal case No. 52017000000000636, regarding the charges under Part 1 of Article 255 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, remains active.
This was reported by the International Detective Bureau.
Six individuals are charged in Case No. 991/2892/22:
- Vadym Alperin (known as the “king of Odessa smuggling,” an Odessa businessman);
- Serhiy Tupalsky (former deputy head of the Kyiv Customs);
- Oleg Sebov;
- Yevgeny Iskold;
- Oleg Shkuratov;
- Alina Skomarova (former director of the State Fiscal Service department).
They are charged with establishing and participating in a criminal organization which, according to the NABU and the SAPO, operated with the aim of systematically evading customs duties (Part 3 of Article 212 of the Criminal Code) and abusing official position (Part 2 of Article 364 of the Criminal Code) at customs. The charges relate to a large-scale scheme to smuggle goods across the Ukrainian border, which caused the state losses amounting to tens of millions of hryvnias.
The defense attorneys (including those representing Alperin, Tupalsky, Skomarova, and others) insisted on the decriminalization of part of the charges under Part 1 of Article 255 of the Criminal Code. They cited amendments to the Criminal Code of 2020 (Law No. 671-IX), which took effect on June 27, 2020.
In particular, the new version of Article 255 no longer provides for liability for “participation in crimes committed by a criminal organization,” and, in the defense’s view, changed the approach to the organization’s purpose (committing serious or particularly serious crimes). The defense argued that the charges were formulated under the old 2001 version, which had partially lost its force, and requested that the proceedings be dismissed pursuant to paragraph 4-1 of Part 1 of Article 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The judge analyzed in detail the old and new versions of Article 255 of the Criminal Code, the explanatory note to the law, and the practice of the Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court. Conclusion:
- The 2020 amendments did not decriminalize the creation of a criminal organization or participation in it as such.
- The legislature merely distinguished between forms of participation (creation/leadership—Part 1, participation—Part 2) and resolved contradictions, but did not abolish criminal liability for the mere existence and activities of a criminal organization.
- The organization’s purpose (committing serious and particularly serious crimes) remains a key element and is confirmed by Part 4 of Article 28 of the Criminal Code, which has not changed.
- Charges under Articles 212 and 364 of the Criminal Code also do not fall under decriminalization, as the incidents were proven to be systematic actions within the framework of an organized group.
Therefore, the court refused to dismiss the proceedings under Article 255 of the Criminal Code regarding all defendants. The trial on the merits is ongoing in the High Anti-Corruption Court.
This is one of the most high-profile “customs” cases of the NABU, concerning corruption schemes at the Odesa and Kyiv customs offices in 2015–2017. Previously, the court had already considered separate motions to dismiss, but the appeals court remanded the proceedings for further consideration.
Vadym Alperin lost his case against Ukraine at the ECHR
The High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) again denied investigators access to Tymoshenko’s handwriting samples.
NABU returned the seized funds to Tymoshenko
As a reminder, the court is considering Tymoshenko’s appeal against the seizure of her property.
The court also lifted the seizure of some of Yulia Tymoshenko’s and her husband’s property.
